Displaying 41 - 60 of 569
FTC Announces 2024 Jurisdictional Threshold Updates for Interlocking Directorates
Syngenta and Corteva, FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission and state partners have filed a complaint in federal court alleging that pesticide manufacturers Syngenta Crop Protection and Corteva, Inc. have used so-called “loyalty” programs to block and restrict generic competition from pesticide markets, leaving farmers to pay elevated prices for crop protection. The complaint seeks to bar Syngenta and Corteva from continuing these programs and from entering into any similar arrangements in the future, and to restore competition to affected markets.
FTC Challenges More Than 100 Patents as Improperly Listed in the FDA’s Orange Book
FTC Takes Total Wine to Federal Court to Enforce Compliance with Antitrust Civil Investigative Demand
Retail Services & Systems, Inc. d/b/a Total Wine & More, FTC v.
U.S. Anesthesia Partners, Inc., FTC v.
FTC Issues Policy Statement on Brand Pharmaceutical Manufacturers’ Improper Listing of Patents in the Food and Drug Administration’s ‘Orange Book’
Federal Trade Commission Statement Concerning Brand Drug Manufacturers' Improper Listing of Patents in the Orange Book
Surescripts LLC
The FTC sued the health information company Surescripts, alleging that the company employed illegal vertical and horizontal restraints in order to maintain its monopolies over two electronic prescribing, or “e-prescribing,” markets: routing and eligibility. According to the complaint, Surescripts monopolized two separate markets for e-prescription services: The market for routing e-prescriptions, which uses technology that enables health care providers to send electronic prescriptions directly to pharmacies; and the market for determining eligibility, a separate service that enables health care providers to electronically determine patients’ eligibility for prescription coverage through access to insurance coverage and benefits information, usually through a pharmacy benefit manager.The FTC alleges that Surescripts intentionally set out to keep e-prescription routing and eligibility customers on both sides of each market from using additional platforms (a practice known as multihoming) using anticompetitive exclusivity agreements, threats, and other exclusionary tactics. Among other things, the FTC alleges that Surescripts took steps to increase the costs of routing and eligibility multihoming through loyalty and exclusivity contracts.
In July 2023, the FTC filed a proposed order that would resolve the Commission’s charges. The proposed order prohibits Surescripts from engaging in exclusionary conduct and executing or enforcing non-compete agreements with current and former employees. The proposed order also goes beyond routing and eligibility, extending the same prohibitions to Surescripts’ medication history services and the company’s on-demand formulary services.
FTC Reaches Proposed Settlement with Surescripts in Illegal Monopolization Case
FTC Votes to Issue Statement Withdrawing Prior Pharmacy Benefit Manager Advocacy
Federal Trade Commission Withdraws Health Care Enforcement Policy Statements
FTC Announces Tentative Agenda for July 20 Open Commission Meeting
Displaying 41 - 60 of 569